- Xi Jinping accused the US of trying to trick China into invading Taiwan, the Financial Times said.
- The Chinese leader made the claim to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, per the FT.
- One expert told BI it’s a sign that China is “genuinely surprised” by the attitude of US officials.
…
For decades, the US has adopted “strategic ambiguity” toward Taiwan, positioning itself as the country’s most steadfast ally, while declining to explicitly say whether it would come to Taiwan’s aid if China attacked.
But the mood in Washington, DC, seems to be shifting, with Congress showing itself more “overtly supportive of Taiwan than only a few years ago,” Graeme Thompson, an analyst with the Eurasia Group, told Business Insider in November.
…
“The US has plenty of public figures now talking of Taiwan like it is a new Ukraine, and some even saying it needs to be diplomatically recognized,” Brown added.
This is like Saul Goodman levels of bullshit
He knows China doesn’t have the capability to invade Taiwan, but needs to save face. So… the evil foreigners are trying to trick us, but I’m too smart to fall for their tricks!
Fascist propaganda 101, always blame the foreigners for everything.
Well it has the capability of trying. It would end up costing them insanely more than it could possibly gain, but still.
Xi needs to keep people thinking he’s the strongman that’s protecting China from the evil foreigners. If he tries to invade Taiwan and fails (the most likely outcome) he appears weak and it’s over for him.
He knows China doesn’t have the capability to invade Taiwan
Large scale ground invasions are generally a losing game.
But the Chinese strategy towards Taiwan has always been the same strategy as Hong Kong, Tibet, and Mongolia. Become economically invaluable and set policy through soft power.
The only real incentive to send in ground troops would be to respond to a Cuba Missile style escalation. And it no longer looks like the Americans are interested in installing short range missiles on the island, now that they have exhausted themselves arming Ukraine.
Large scale ground invasions are generally a losing game.
Large scale amphibious assaults even moreso. I feel like people keep forgetting Taiwan is an island. Sure China has a massive army and could throw a lot of waves of soldiers in a straight up ground campaign, but with Taiwan it wouldn’t be a straight up ground campaign.
So yeah their strat would have to be based around economy and politics for the time being. Sure they’re improving their Navy, but it’s probably be at least a decade (if ever) they could have successful military action on Taiwan other than just sabre rattling.
Oh no. Xi saw through our dastardly reverse psychology. Now we have no choice but to watch him not invade our ally. How horrific.
I have a spare deck of UNO cards, should the US require them for a strategic response.
And the Russians where also very vocal about not invading Ukraine right up to the moment that they did. So what I’m trying to say is “talk is cheap”.
Ok. He’s copying putain. We are doomed
So far, he’s being smarter than monkey putin.
We need to stop acknowledging the one China policy. China is threatening war against Taiwan, and there should be absolutely zero doubt that we don’t condone Chinese aggression towards Taiwan.
EU and other allies should of course not support it either.I mean China can’t really do anything about the autonomous mainland provinces steadfastly refusing to declare independence, even if you can find precedent of a sovereign state kicking out its provinces unilaterally it’d still be a dick move.
What? I have no idea where that came from? The One China policy is about reuniting Taiwan with mainland China.
In principle I don’t mind that China wants Taiwan to reunite with China, as long as they are perfectly peaceful about it, like with Germany and Est Germany.
But what are you talking about?
The one China policy is just a diplomatic hedge.
Everyone will SAY there is “one China”, but nations can make defense pacts with specific “parts” of China, even in the event of “invasion” from a different part of that same “one China”.
One China is about those mental gymnastics. Buying into “one China” isn’t about supporting the reunification of Taiwan. Never was. It’s the opposite.
Yes, I missed that, that’s quite clever and funny. 😀
The one China policy is first and foremost about the principle that there is only one China. Hence the name: That the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China are still locked in a civil war, that neither declared independence from the other. There is no “reuniting” because you cannot unite what is not split, they’re still one.
Which is a rather different situation from divided Germany: The East declared independence as a new state, and the West accepted it. The West still considered Eastern citizens who made their way across the border her own citizens, but there was no “you can’t have your own sovereign state” stuff going on, from either side. Upon reunification the East re-introduced its federal states, which then jointly but individually joined the West, leaving the East without territory and people which thus vanished in a puff of how international law defines the concept of a state.
The Mainland could pull an East Germany and declare independence at any time, Taipei would accept it. Some old-guard Kuomintang would gripe but they’d get over it. Taipei declaring independence makes no sense… independence from whom? Imperial China? They won that struggle before the PRC even existed. It’s the PRC which is rebel faction in the civil war, you don’t declare independence from rebels if then you grant them independence and, well, the rebels don’t want independence.
Eh, no.
Western Germany recognized the border between Poland - the Oder-Neisse line in 1970.
Additionally, while Western Germany recognized the GDR was its own state - starting 1972 - they didn’t recognize its right to exist under international law. The German constitution stated up until the reunification:
The whole German People remains compelled to fulfill the Unity and Freedom of Germany by virtue of its right to free self-determination.
This implied there was only one Germany, in area and population greater than just Western Germany.
Also, German public broadcast used the upper left map for weather reporting up until the 70s, when they switched to the one on the top right without any borders. After the reunification, the bottom one was used:
Additionally, reunified Germany put numerous GDR leaders and a few soldiers on trial for murdering those trying to flee the GDR. However, the courts had to argue with the GDR’s constitution - which fortunately for the courts was quite the self-contradictory document.
Western Germany recognized the border between Poland - the Oder-Neisse line in 1970.
There was no final settlement until 1990. Because you cannot give up claims on territory you don’t actually control, the ROC is in a similar situation with Mongolia. In Germany’s case there’s the additional complication that until 1990, occupation statutes still applied.
This implied there was only one Germany, in area and population greater than just Western Germany.
No, it didn’t. First off, the preamble isn’t actually part of the constitution, secondly, it did not in any way or form claim rule or sovereignty over the Eastern states. “We’d like to re-absorb those territories” is a different thing than “those territories remain ours”.
Also, German public broadcast used the upper left map for weather reporting up until the 70s, when they switched to the one on the top right without any borders.
Until the early 60s, both sides claimed to be the successor state to the German Empire, the GDR dropped that claim with the construction of the wall. After literally a decade of discussion the West changed to the Neue Ostpolitik in the early 70s and recognised the GDR as a separate state in its territory but did not change its own self-conception as successor state of the Empire. With that it also stopped applying the Hallstein doctrine, stopped to consider other states recognising the GDR as sovereign to be a hostile act.
Then came the two-state period, then there was a revolution in the GDR and while we call it reunification, legally it was the absorption of federal states which happen to be on the territory of the now-former GDR into the constitutional framework of the FRG. Nothing special, happened before with Saarland. If you want to draw a parallel to China I guess you can make one: To the until 1960 situation, with the PRC saying “There’s going to be trouble, ROC, if you move to any other position, it’s the status quo or proper unification no alternative”.
Also, German public broadcast
…is not controlled by the government, least of all the federal government which is responsible, or at least co-responsible, for all foreign policy (but religion and culture because there the federal states are completely sovereign). It does reflect the political attitude back then: That the status quo borders were “arbitrary” and until there’s a better set, the old ones still somehow apply even if it doesn’t match the situation on the ground. The switch in 1970 was the broadcasters throwing their hands up in the air.
And you know what I think the map until 1970 is missing the border to Denmark if I’m not mistaken.
You’re right about the first part, I just remembered the Neue Ostpolitik marking a significant change.
As to the constitution: While the preamble isn’t its own article, it’s just as much a part of the constitution as every other part.
Here’s what the Bundesverfassungsgericht (German Constitutional Court) ruled:
The German Reich continues to exist and still has legal capacity, but is not itself capable of acting as an overall state due to a lack of organization, in particular due to a lack of institutionalized bodies.[…]
The German Democratic Republic belongs to Germany and cannot be regarded as a foreign country in relation to the Federal Republic of Germany.
No constitutional body of the Federal Republic of Germany may abandon the restoration of state unity as a political goal; all constitutional bodies are obliged to work towards the achievement of this goal in their policies - this includes the demand to keep the claim to reunification alive internally and to persistently defend it externally - and to refrain from doing anything that would thwart reunification.
Untrustworthy, but not wrong source for the quotes
And while German public broadcast isn’t controlled by the government, it is a good indicator for the political beliefs of the general population and the government.
The situation cannot be appropriately compared to the PRC and ROC, as there are significant differences. What can be compared is that the FRG never recognized the GDR as a state legitimated by international law. Just like the One-China-policy, the FRG had a One-Germany policy in its constitution.
They’re making a “Taiwan is actually China” joke. Referring to the mainland as “provinces that refuse to declare independence”
OK, I missed that completely, but I can see that’s actually quite funny.
“Once China” sounds like a good policy :D
I have no idea how that happened, but it’s corrected now.
So this means invasion in sept? If we were to follow what happened in Ukraine?
October and even then you might get the odd Typhoon https://old.reddit.com/r/taiwan/comments/jawz01/does_the_taiwan_strait_really_suffer_from/
Xi taking a page out of the abusive husband playbook, I see.
You show America, Pooh Bear! Pledge to never attack Taiwan! Really show them by recognizing its sovereignty and normalizing trade relations!
“Taiwan is its own state, and should remain so in perpetuity. China will be their shoreline supporters! --Xi”
submit
“Yeah, that’ll show them.” Said Xi as he sat back with satisfaction and dipped his hand into a jar of honey.
deleted by creator
I’ve been saying for months that he should reclaim Upper Manchuria or Northern Manchuria. Don’t remember what it was called till Russia invaded in 1901. That would give him the military victory he’s looking for, and it’s not like anyone is gonna complain about Russia being weakened by losing its only warm water Pacific port. It’s currently called Vladivostok
As absurd as it seems sometimes, the One China policy has kept the peace for decades. I wouldn’t toss it out without a very, very good reason.
I mean, to people under 50ish, Taiwan is a stable, functioning democracy with an advanced economy but that didn’t really happen until 1987. It was basically a fascistic military dictatorship prior to that. It’s a much more complicated history than we sometimes acknowledge. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Taiwan_(1945–present)
I’m an elder millennial, I guess, and I was alive but too young to remember Taiwan’s first real elections. I get that the One China policy might feel like a relic of a bygone era since I know it from history books too. But most world leaders are old enough to remember when Taiwan was a dysfunctional, fascistic military dictatorship. It might require another few generations of peace before it’s fully consolidated.
I mean, to put it in perspective, Robocop, Lethal Weapon, and Predator came out in 1987. People old enough to see those movies in theaters remember a different era and likely have a fundamentally different understanding of Taiwan/Mainland relations. Xi, Biden, and Trump are all over 70.
Bro, Trump doesn’t know shit about anything. Xi and Biden though know very well.
Frankly it’s in Xi’s best benefit to not invade Taiwan, because it would cause a collapse of the One China policy. China benefits considerably from the current policy that’s ambiguous on recognizing Taiwan. The moment they invade though, that goes away, and it becomes inevitable that Taiwan gains international recognition as independent – presuming the US helps repel an invasion.
If there’s anything we’ve learned though from the last few years, it’s that seemingly intelligent world leaders can make idiotic decisions that go against their best interest – namely Putin and Ukraine. Xi strikes me as the type of person to keep yesmen like Putin, and that means he could make just as foolish a mistake.
Whatever keeps his ass out of the sling
while declining to explicitly say whether it would come to Taiwan’s aid if China attacked.
“You didn’t want to get involved in the Ukraine conflict militarily for obvious reasons,” a reporter said to Mr. Biden. “Are you willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that?”
“Yes,” Mr. Biden answered flatly.
“You are?” the reporter followed up.
“That’s the commitment we made,” he said.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/23/world/asia/biden-taiwan-china.html
Sounds more like someone came to their senses but tries to save face…hopefully. You never know if this is just a strategic move to make others believe they won’t attack.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Chinese leader Xi Jinping has accused the US of trying to trick China into invading Taiwan, but he said it won’t take the bait, the Financial Times reported, citing people familiar with the matter.
According to the FT, Xi made the accusation during a meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in April last year.
Xi has issued the same warning to officials in his own country, one source told the FT, but this would be the first time he made the claim to a foreign leader, the outlet said.
But the mood in Washington, DC, seems to be shifting, with Congress showing itself more “overtly supportive of Taiwan than only a few years ago,” Graeme Thomson, an analyst with the Eurasia Group, told BI in November.
Last month, a US congressional delegation met with senior Taiwanese officials to discuss US-Taiwan relations, a few days after China conducted military drills around the island.
During a meeting in April, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi warned US Secretary of State Antony Blinken not to cross China’s “red lines” on sovereignty, security, and development interests.
The original article contains 555 words, the summary contains 184 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
It’s wild that the US is trying to escalate tensions with China when it’s still busy with Russia.
Now we need a report saying the same for the Russians in Ukraine
It’s not a trap, because they were warned beforehand about what would happen if you did it. It’s a dare, like in “Jackass!”.
